EAC Heritage Management Symposium 22nd March 2013 Saranda, Albania

The Valletta Convention: Twenty Years After – Challenges for the future 20th Anniversary of Valletta Convention: Benefits, Problems, Challenges

The Valletta Convention (The European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (Revised)) was adopted on 16 January 1992 in Valletta (Malta) and came into force on 25 May 1995 (Council of Europe Treaty Series no. 143). 42 states have signed and ratified the Convention; three 3 states have signed without ratification, and three states have not signed.

The Valletta Convention specifically reflected the changing approaches to the management of the archaeological heritage which had developed since the London Convention of 1969. In particular, it addressed the change in the nature of threats to the archaeological heritage, which now came less from unauthorised excavations, as in the 1960s, and more from the major construction projects carried out all over Europe from 1980 onwards. The Convention established a body of new basic legal standards for Europe, to be met by national policies for the protection of archaeological assets as sources of scientific and documentary evidence, in line with the principles of integrated conservation

Since 1992, approaches to archaeological heritage management, and indeed heritage management as a whole have inevitably continued to develop and evolve and this is reflected in particular by a much more integrative approach which attempts to deal with the whole of the historic environment (archaeology, buildings, and landscapes) in a more integrated and seamless fashion. To some extent these changes are reflected in more recent conventions: The Florence Convention (The European Landscape Convention, 2000) which promotes the protection, management and planning of European landscapes and organises European co- operation on landscape issues, and the Faro Convention (The Council of Europe Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society, 2005) which presents heritage both as a resource for human development, the enhancement of cultural diversity and the promotion of intercultural dialogue, and as part of an economic development model based on the principles of sustainable resource use. Nevertheless, the Valletta Convention still remains the core management text for archaeological heritage management current across most of Europe and is unchanged after 20 years.

In view of the very significant and far reaching impacts on the management of the cultural heritage which are resulting from current fundamental changes to the political, economic, and social context throughout Europe, it is appropriate to take stock of the current situation, to identify the many benefits and advantages that have resulted from the Valletta Convention, but also to identify any continuing problems associated with its implementation, and to consider the many challenges presented by these rapidly changing circumstances, and what the sector might be able to do to address those challenges.

1 1 Key changes: 1969-1992reflected in the Valletta Convention

1.1 Archaeological heritage – a changing definition Archaeological heritage includes structures, buildings, groups of buildings, developed sites, movable remains and monuments of other types, together with their surroundings, whether they are located underground or underwater. Since the London Convention of 1969, the definition of archaeological heritage has changed. For example, items found during excavations are no longer regarded as the only things of importance. Every trace or relic liable to shed light on an aspect of humankind’s past and further our knowledge of history and human beings’ relations with their natural habitat now takes on its full heritage dimension.

1.2 A source of Europe’s collective memory The Valletta Convention highlights the scientific importance of archaeological heritage. Previously, archaeological sites and monuments were excavated in order to remove objects and place them museums and art galleries. Many people used to regard this heritage as a source of commercial profit, and many still do today. States must try to prevent this kind of archaeology. Thanks to ever more advanced scientific techniques, studies of archaeological heritage provide precious nuggets of information on the development of humankind in Europe. Ultimately, this is one of the sources of Europe’s collective memory and a tool for historical and scientific study, which needs to be protected.

1.3 Archaeology and spatial planning The Valletta Convention established a direct interaction between archaeology and spatial planning. Since 1969 there had been an increase in population, living standards and the number and complexity of development projects, which included major public works (motorways, underground railways and high-speed trains, replanning of old town centers, car parks, etc.) and activities in the countryside (reafforestation, land consolidation, etc.). These activities generated new threats to the discovery and protection of archaeological heritage.

1.4 Identification of archaeological heritage and legal protection measures The Valletta Convention emphasized the particular importance and usefulness of finding out about the archaeological heritage by means of a detailed inventory when devising spatial planning projects. Legal measures recommended by the Convention include systems to regulate the conduct of excavations on public and private land.

1.5 Integrated conservation The application of integrated conservation principles to the archaeological heritage was intended to ensure that states encourage archaeologists and town and spatial planners to cooperate throughout the entire planning process. New constructions should not affect the landscape or the situation of a site by, for example, altering a watercourse, wind patterns or sunlight distribution.

1.6 Funding of archaeological activity The Valletta Convention requires each state party to support archaeological research financially and promote rescue archaeology, using public or private funding as the case may be. It introduced new opportunities for the funding of development-led archaeology. Costs include

2 both the archaeological work itself and the work after the excavations, including research, archiving, and the preparation of catalogues and reports.

1.7 Dissemination of information and mutual technical assistance Scientific information collected on site and subsequent reports by specialists must be broadly disseminated and mutual technical and scientific assistance must be developed through exchanges of people in the occupations linked to archaeological heritage conservation.

1.8 Public awareness-raising about archaeological heritage The more aware the public are of the value of the heritage, the less inclined they are to damage or destroy it. This is why the Valletta Convention reiterates that steps must be taken to facilitate access to sites and artefacts. Under some circumstances public access has to be denied in order to protect heritage − for example certain caves containing prehistoric rock art have been closed because public access raises the humidity level and causes bacterial growth leading to decay of the paintings. In such cases sites will be presented in other forms, such as full-scale replicas.

1.9 Preventing the illegal circulation of artefacts The illegal circulation of artefacts can be restricted through co-operation between states, informing each other when a suspect object appears on the market. The Convention points out that the best way of guarding against trading in items from illegal excavations is to educate the public, showing that removing an item from its context destroys the scientific value of the object itself as well as damaging site from which it came.

2 1992-2012 Key changes 2.1 Integrated approaches to Heritage Management 2.2 Value-led Conservation 2.3 Climate Change (changing relationship with nature conservation, energy efficiency etc) 2.4 Localism & Devolution of decision-making in spatial planning 2.5 Role of the 3rd Sector (volunteers) 2.6 Digital information revolution & public participation 2.7 Economic crises (reducing public/private resources, structural changes ) 2.8 Higher societal expectation

3 3 Roles and Responsibilities in taking the Valletta Convention forward

3.1 Observatory / Monitoring function The key objectives, and the various provisions to achieve them, that are set out in the Valletta Convention are very clear, and the Council of Europe continues to exercise an important role in coordinating action to monitor and implement these provisions, with the express purpose of pooling information about heritage policies in Europe in order to identify potential problems, and to help states meet new challenges and work together to find the most appropriate solutions and thereby to raise standards.

3.1 Council of Europe The new Council of Europe Steering Committee for Culture, Heritage and Landscape (CDCPP) will carry on overseeing this important work, assisted by specialist expert groups: Such as the Europae Archaeologiae Consilium (EAC) which has been cooperating with the CoE closely on the follow up to the Valetta Convention and strengthening the tools available on the European Heritage Network (HEREIN). The HEREIN network (and the newly formed independent HEREIN Association: HEREIN aisbl) bring together government departments responsible for cultural heritage under the umbrella of the Council of Europe as a reference point for government bodies, professionals, research workers and non-governmental organizations active in this field. The HEREIN information system is an essential part of this process and when completed will comprise a database on heritage policies kept up to date by the national coordinators of the system, coupled with a multilingual thesaurus and a variety of services under development which should foster transnational cooperation between public actors in the field of heritage and more widespread information for the general public.

3.2 EAC The EAC is very well placed indeed to assist with and participate in this process drawing upon its considerable expertise both in heritage management practice and in the implementation of heritage policy both in a national and in a pan-European context. In particular EAC members can bring their own perspectives to bear to help identify those elements of the Valletta Convention that may have been less successfully implemented, or which require further analysis and attention if the original objectives of the Convention are to be met in full. In addition, by virtue of their own position, EAC members will be acutely aware of the new approaches to, and the severe pressures on archaeological heritage management that have emerged since 1992, and which are most likely to intensify in the near future. To this end, EAC members can advise on those specific areas where the provisions of the Valletta Convention might require possible adjustment, or more practically the EAC can help highlight specific areas of new policy that need to be enhanced or developed under the general framework of the Valletta Convention.

4 Draft Programme

The Symposium should necessarily include an element of reflection in terms of assessing the benefits of the Valetta Convention, and identifying any shortcomings and problems with its implementation, but should perforce focus mainly on the future in terms of 1) identifying any priorities that must be addressed as a matter of urgency (provided that these are accompanied by a compelling case) and 2) pointing the way in terms of understanding the key challenges that we are confronting, and how and what heritage management policies will be needed to meet these challenges. As part of this process we are going to develop a short questionnaire and conduct a rapid (on-line) survey of members’ perspectives about the Valletta Convention

Friday 22 March 2013

09:00-13:00 Twenty Years After

09:00-09:15 Welcome & Introduction: the aspirations and impact of the Valletta Convention

THE INSPIRATION OF VALLETTA

09:15-10:00 Key Note Address: Valletta Convention: motives / origins / objectives – what were the philosophy and ideas that underpinned the drafting of the Convention?

IMPLEMENTATION OF VALLETTA

10:00-10:30 Successes

Setting out and headlining the very obvious successes of the Valletta Convention . Although there are clear differences in implementation in different states, there is now a broadly consistent yet pluralistic framework which sets the core standards for the practice and management of archaeology across the whole of Europe; . This framework is accepted by national governments who now give a much higher prominence to archaeology than previously;’ . As part of this process, archaeology is now firmly integrated everywhere one way or another into spatial planning, and archaeologists are now properly included in the relevant decision making processes; . Archaeological work resulting from spatial planning is now placed on a much firmer, more structured funding basis than was possible previously; this has lead to a significant increase in the volume of archaeological work everywhere, and an equally significant increase in our knowledge and understanding to the past.

10:30-11:00 BREAK

11:00-13:00 Issues – to improve the professional performance and to achieve greater acceptance The identification of specific issues which were included in the Valletta Convention, but which still represent ‘unfinished business’ ie where there is still work to do before it could be said that the Valletta Convention has achieved its aims.

5 . The relationship to research ie ensuring that all archaeological work, whether so-called programmed scientific work, or responsive so-called rescue / preventive work in a development context is properly designed and has research objectives from the outset; . Training The Valletta Convention places great emphasis on adequate training and exchange of information / expertise but to date this area is perhaps still very under-developed certainly in an international context and very frequently in national contexts as well. What are the reasons for this? . Archives: there is a widespread recognition that there is an ‘archives crisis’ across much of Europe which relates not only to responsibilities for creating archives but also for their proper storage in appropriate depots etc. there are some positive moves in some states, but much more needs to be done. How can this be taken forward today? . Dissemination Not just about the publication of ‘scientific results’ at a professional level, which is broadly accepted although even here there is still much to be achieved, but about how the information generated by archaeological work can be disseminated to the wider public, and more importantly, be used to encourage a greater public awareness and ownership of the values that underpin the need for archaeological work ie how to transform dissemination so that it is more than ‘entertainment’ or ‘infotainment’ but also achieves public and political support. There is much to be learnt from other public movements that have been very successful in this sphere

13:00-14:00 LUNCH

CHALLENGES

14:00-15:30 Changing Circumstances

Session arranged around reflections about the current situation ie what has actually changed since the Valletta Convention was drafted and what the impacts of these changes might be on the practice of archaeology. This session could include some of the approaches that have evolved during the past 20 years, which were not thought of at the time the Convention was drafted.

. Integrated approaches to heritage Archaeology is much less a freestanding topic than it used to be. Many countries are integrating approaches to Archaeology, Buildings, and landscapes, both in terms of management and implementation, and unified legal systems. Is this simply a response to the current need to save money or is there a beneficial higher purpose in either case this has significant implications for how archaeology is practiced as part of a wider context, and on the people managing archaeology and making decisions. How has the discipline responded to these changes? . Value-led approach / localism / political devolution /third sector (public): the values led approach that is being increasingly adopted in some countries forces archaeologists to be much more pluralistic and accepting of values that lie outside their traditional ‘academic’ area and the different roles of the different actors. This approach is implicit in the Florence and Faro Conventions, but to what extent is it being accepted by archaeologists and how can we make this happen without sacrificing some of the core values of archaeology? How to accommodate the new approaches (and the much wider range of non-professional values that they entail) within the implementation of existing traditional mechanisms and instruments at the same time as retaining the societal benefits accrued through other more traditional instruments. Heritage managers need to consider the new working practices that incorporate these new approaches. . Economic crisis :in many states the current economic crisis having a significant impact on the nature of archaeology – not just by reducing capacity, but also by forcing major changes in how and what work is actually done

6 . Digital swift: creating databases – metadata – connecting different information sources; enlarged access to different sources, on-line publication, internal problems on the internet

15:30-16:00 BREAK

16:00-17:00 Future developments

Signaling the key issues which are beginning to emerge, and which we will need to deal with in coming years.

. Social . Migration . Time / Place . Faro / Florence issues surrounding context and ownership

17:00-17:30 Conclusion / Afterword: Keynote

Conclusions: An articulation of the various next steps that the archaeological heritage management sector could or should take to rise to the challenges that have over the last 20 years ie a road map for how we could prepare for the next 20 years

7